Plasma processing tools have long been employed to process wafers and other miniature devices (e.g., flat panels, nanomachines, etc.). Cluster tools, representing variants of plasma processing tools, have been widely used. In a cluster tool, multiple processing chambers are clustered around one or more transfer modules. Each of the processing chambers is configurable for one or more specific processes. By moving the semiconductor substrate from processing chamber to processing chamber of a cluster tool, a manufacturer can subject the substrate to multiple processes and multiple processing recipes in a fairly short amount of time. Improved throughput is one of the advantages of using a cluster tool in a manufacturing environment.
To facilitate discussion, FIG. 1 shows a cluster tool 100, representing a high level, simplified logical representation of a typical cluster tool. Cluster tool 100 includes a front end 102 and a back end 104. Front end 102 may be thought of as the portion of cluster tool 100 that is at atmospheric pressure and through which substrates may be inserted into and removed from the cluster tool. Back end 104 includes the actual process modules where the substrates are processed.
More specifically, front end 102 of FIG. 1 includes a plurality of ports 110, 112, and 114, representing ports for inputting substrates into and discharging substrates from cluster tool 100. The substrates then enter one of the airlocks 120 and 122, which maintain the pressure differential between back end 104 and front end 102. From airlocks 120 and 122, substrates are then transferred into a common transfer module (TM) 130, which serves as a common transfer point as substrates are shuffled among process modules (PM) 140, 142, 144, and 146. Each of process modules is configured to perform one or more specific processes using specific recipes. For examples, a process module may be configured for polysilicon etching, another process module may be configured for nitride deposition, and another process module of the same cluster tool may be configured for metal etching. Cluster tool 100 may include other modules (such as atmospheric processing module or APM), and other subsystems not shown in FIG. 1. As these and other major subsystems of a cluster tool are well known to those skilled in the art, the major subsystems will not be listed or discussed in details herein.
A cluster tool may differ from another cluster tool in the number of major subsystems (e.g., the number and/or type of processing modules). Furthermore, even if two cluster tools have an identical number of process modules of identical types, for example, these two cluster tools may still differ because the subsystems and subcomponents that make up these two cluster tools may be different. For example, two metal etch process modules may have different mass flow controllers or vacuum pumps.
To elaborate, a manufacturer of cluster tool 100, such as Lam Research Corporation of Fremont, Calif., typically utilizes subsystems and components from a number of third-party vendors in the manufactured cluster tool. In fact, such practice is standard in the semiconductor processing equipment field since it permits companies to focus on their strengths while delegating tasks outside of their fields of interest or expertise to other companies.
Accordingly, cluster tools are manufactured using different components and subsystems from different vendors. The decision regarding which components or which subsystems would be incorporated into a given cluster tool is a complex decision process, factoring in economics, pricing strategies, technical capabilities, changing technologies, customer requirements, competitive positioning, and/or other factors. Further, it is not unusual that cluster tools are improved with one or more new components monthly or quarterly. This factor, coupled with different customer requirements, results in a substantial likelihood that a cluster tool shipped by a manufacturer today may be different in some way from all other cluster tools shipped previously by that manufacturer. Yet, there is a common requirement to all cluster tools: the need to configure the cluster tool for use with appropriate configuration software and/or configuration files. Since most subsystems and components are electronically controlled, as is the case with all modern hardware, there is a need to configure the individual components/subsystems as well as the need to configure the components/subsystems in an assembled cluster tool to work together.
Traditionally, each cluster tool is provided with its own configuration software, which is custom-coded for the specific subsystems and components that make up the assembled cluster tool. Custom-coding is, however, both time-consuming and expensive. The delay and cost associated with the custom-coding affects users not only during the initial purchase phase but also at every update cycle when the cluster tool is updated with new subsystems and/or components. Over time, the need to maintain different configuration software programs for different versions of the cluster tool has become burdensome for manufacturers and users of cluster tools alike. For some manufacturers, the need to support literally hundreds of different versions of cluster tool configuration software has become a problem.
It is recognized by the inventors herein if a universal configuration tool can be created, manufacturers and/or users of cluster tools may be able to configure and support cluster tools with less time delay and cost. Furthermore, it is recognized by the inventors herein that a properly designed configuration tool may also be employed to prevent the use of unauthorized components/subsystems in a given cluster tool, may support different pricing structures based on the degree of configuration flexibility granted, may be employed to support efforts in cluster tool development and/or may be employed for simulation purposes. This application addresses such an improved cluster tool configuration tool.